Is religion really worth it?

I consider organized religion to be one of the lower levels of existence. One cannot hope to embody morals and values from a shrine or temple that one does not already possess in ones self.

"Your rights end where mine begine.." Ithink it applies to this. On a side note an individual can and usually obsess over something to the point of insanity, this is possible with or without religion. If "God" didn't tell him to kill his whole family, the dog did...

The debate isn't about beliefs or faith. Those are personal matters and extremely subjective and therefor hard to debate.

The question is about organized religion. If you want to say a silent prayer to yourself before you parachute out of a plane knock yourself out. If you want shout you allegiance to the ritualistic institution of your demented choice before trying to open the door of and airliner and kill everyone on board because they don't meet the standard of your religion then we have a problem.

echoz -- wtf?

Or rather, relax. If you agree with me, great. If you don't, so what? Who cares what I think?

Why take it so personally? Why not just shrug your shoulders and just disagree?

Let's take it down to zero and ask the base question driving this whole debate: is belief in the supernatural rational or not?

We can all agree (I assume) that believing in Leprechauns is a irrational belief and we would (generally) all agree that someone who went out searching for this magical being and it's Pot O' Gold would be an irrational person.

Why? Why would we all agree that THAT person's supernatural beliefs is irrational but then turn around and defend a different supernatural belief (Christianity) as rational?

Now here's where I think the pseudo-intellectuallism (IMHO) comes in. When you readily acknowledge that supernatual belief X is irrational (beliving in Leprechauns) but then try to rationalize supernatual belief Z. That where we see a lot of circular reasoning and re-definition of words and ideas. But let's get back to the main point.

Is is irrational to believe that any of the Marvel comic X-mens are REAL people and have REAL magical powers? Yes. Would it be irrational (be honest) to PRAY to Cyclops or Wolverine to ask them (telepathically via prayer) to assist you with your problems? Yup.

Okay. So THAT supernatural belief is silly.

But now we turn to Jesus who has his own supernatural powers such as levitation (can walk on water), can rearrange molecules to transmogrify water into wine and can even reanimate dead bodies! Take that Magneto! No wonder this guy has such a following!

So believing the X-men are real people is silly, but we're supposed to take the comic book antics of Jesus seriously and treat people who believe in his alleged superpowers no differently than someone who doesn't believe the X-men are real people and doesn't believe Jesus has superpowers?

What's the difference between taking a comic book literally and taking a 3,000 year old Hebrew myth literally? Arent they both equally irrational?

The believers are, understandably, trying to create distinctions between the two when in reality comic books and Hebrew myths are indentical.

crob stfu with that bs...you take the most absurd cases and color the whole group with it to suit your prejudice. Like people can't see through the fact that you too have bias all your own. Have you ever seen Jack Ass??? Oh yeah, they all go to the church of the poison mind, right??? and you would know this because your logic is your god, and as good as it ever gets.

Even Pontius Pilate had the sense to ask "What is truth?" and make dam sure to wash his hands...

vierotka,

you hint at something of interest but fail to fully articulate your view when you say, "One either knows or one doesn't know. When one doesn't know, one may choose to believe, or to not believe."

I might agree with you that there is difference between belief and knowledge. Knowledge is more certain than beliefs but this doesnt mean all beliefs lack a measure of certainty. Some beliefs are more certain than others.

Now, there are some people who claim to have good reason to have a high degree of certainty with regards to their belief in God. Why is this on its face problematic? That is to say, why couldn't belief (and not knowledge of God) be an adequate mental posture.

Further, there are those who claim to know God. This is a stronger claim, especially if you equate knowledge=certitude. Again, on its face, there doesnt seem to be a reason why this couldnt be true.

All this to say, by degrading religious mental attitudes from knowledge to belief, you arent really doing anything. Even further, some would resist your degradation of their knowledge to some lower order status like belief.

crob,

you seem to suggest that articulating religious beliefs (as is the domain of theology and philosophy) is pseudo intellectual? why think this? What counts as real intellectual work and what counts as pseudo-intellectual? I'm wondering if your standard is as arbitrary as your reasoning.

Again, you draw a false distinction btw religion and philosophy, as there are religions who do not believe in the supernatural and philosophers (like Plato, whom you mentioned) who do. So stop with your 'Religion is philosophy w/ supernatural authority" because not only is it false, you've been given reason to think its false (e.g., my clear example) and to continue to show disregard for the facts makes you strongly irrational.

Now as to another of your half-baked theses: you claim the religious believer is more prone to being irrational than the non-believer. why think this? in fact, here you're irrational again because you;ve committed a logical fallacy...you beg the question by implying the believer believes in a false belief. But that is precisely what is being debated: namely, is the believer justified in believing in God. If belief in God were rational, then it seems the non-believer would be more prone to irrationality as she doesn't believe an important fact about our world: namely, God exists. So she might go around choosing behavior and believe propositions she might not if she was aware of the truth.

echoz -- you're right. Making irrational decisions isn't exclusive to those who believe in the supernatural, just more common I believe.

And that's what this is....a belief in the supernatural.

Anyone can make a bad decision and anyone can believe something totally wrong -- but people who subscribe to a belief in the supernatural are much more prone to taking irrational acts. Whereas the atheist refuses (generally) to base his or her decisions on something that isn't scientific -- the believers do!

An atheist would never jump off a building believing that the laws of gravity don't apply to them. Believers would.

An atheist wouldn't refuse to leave a burning building because they think they will be saved by magic. A believer would.

The more strongly a person believes in the power of the supernatural the more prone they are to irrational/illogical acts.

Would an atheist strap explosives to themselves and blow themselves up? Yes. It's possible.

Is it much, much more likely that a strong believer in the supernatural (Islam) would take that same action under the belief that a supernatural reward awaited them in a supernatural afterlife. Yup.

Would an atheist handle poisonous snakes? Very few. How many believers in the supernatural routinely handle dangerous snakes? Thousands and thousands!

Irrational behavior is not exclusive to believers in the supernatural -- just more likely to occur.

LOL yeah that's it =D

Isn't that the old joke about the guy stranded on the roof in a flood and helicopter comes by and he refuses to go saying "god will provide" and then an ATV comes to save him and he repeats "god will provide". Finally a power boat flags him down but he waves them off yelling "GOD WILL PROVIDE". So he drowns and gets to heaven and asks God, what the hell? and he/she says hey I provided a helicopter, an ATV and a power boat what did u need a freakin' invitation?

yeah I disagree crob'. how phukn stupid. yeah score one for stupidity rabid'. and do you think people will be less susceptible to those kinds of idiotic things when it's proposed in the name of science or law??? You can't always help stupidity and those who are willing to take advantage of it.

In fact I've got some snake oil for you right here that will take care of every ailment you got... Oh yeah and a bridge in brooklyn you can call all your own.

Look past your own nose and you'll find the same stupidity everywhere.

religion is the opiate of the masses
--Marx

"I must wear this ridiculous outfit and be a sister-wife to 20 other girls because that's what the powerful Sky God wants and he'll give me magical rewards when I die if I obey."

LMAO! /swish Crob scores a big one there. Religious types always fall back to the "life is so amazing and complex that there HAS to be a god!" Just because something is complex it means that some naked white dude on a cloud had to make it?

I've gotta go back to the whole supernatural arguement.

The ONLY difference between a philosophy and a religion is the supernatural.

Why is religion inferior to philosophy?

Because the appeal to a supernatural authority supercedes results and reality!

Under a religion you can simply ignore results and essentially shrug your shoulders and say, "Well, it's magical and therefore we can't understand it. Therefore we must mindlessly keep sacraficing humans to appease the rain gods." Once you disconect from observable reality your on a slipperly slope.

Once you make the leap to accept magic (basically any religion) then the results don't have to a) make logical sense or b) match up to reality.

If a religious person refuses to leave a room that is on fire because they feel their god will save them magically -- is that an irrational act? We can't have our cake an eat it to. Either beliving in magic and taking actions based on a belief in magic is rational or its not.

Attempts to "rationalize" the supernatural into a modern context seems to be really just a pseudo-intellectual exercise.

Look at the Texas polygamy cults! These people weren't talked into that lifestyle because it make sense to them -- they're doing it because of supernatural reasoning. "I must wear this ridiculous outfit and be a sister-wife to 20 other girls because that's what the powerful Sky God wants and he'll give me magical rewards when I die if I obey."

The most extreme abuses of religion could not exist if it were just a philosophy. Without the "carrot and stick" effect of magic -- it would be much, much more difficult to engage in anti-social, self-destructive or just outright illogical behaviour. Not impossible obviously, just much more difficult.

Obviously that's just my opinion and I'm sure some people will disagree with it -- but let's not pretend that a belief in magic isn't at the heart of the debate. A belief in magic is the first step in a slippery slope that "enables" greater and greater leaps into illogical behavior. For example: is jumping off the Empire State building because you think you can fly an irrational belief? Yes. But what if you jumped off because you believed that in doing so would be perfectly safe because a god would magically protect your from falling?

We can't seperate religion from a belief in magic -- and we have to ask the question: does believing in magic make someone more or less prone to irrational acts?

Vierotchka,

I don't remember saying anything about hundreds of millions? Perhaps you confused one of my responses with someone else's?

A sad commentary is that I think eldamon's premise on the absolute sovereignty of humanism is screwed from the beginning. *Every* institution in this life is flawed. What of government? What of financial institutions? What of people in general, irregardless of law or common decency or even truer religious expectation? Many ideas may start out with good intentions, but give it time...at least religion offers some hope for forgiveness and some potential to move on in good faith with one another, as well as some direction to personal and/or corporate enlightenment, however disputable that might be.

But this "pin the donkey's tail on religion" is utter bs. Human error is the problem. We're all flawed. Call it what you want (ethics calls it the problem of evil) but whatever a human touches is doomed to be less than perfect...eventually. We can do our best and still, we *need* forgiveness and compassion and some understanding for the messes we're all in, in one shape or another...every one of us.

Do you see government holding that out to you? Do you see politicians setting such fine examples? Lawyers? Religious beliefs should afford some honesty in looking at ourselves for what we are...less than perfect. Hope, aside/in spite of our own frail efforts to improve ourselves, is sometimes all that we have. The godless would pay lip service to this fact.

But the unchecked prejudice reserved for religion reminds me of Lenin's philosophy of violence in enlisting Pavlov's "emancipating" indoctrinations:

"I want the masses of Russia to follow...[the same] pattern of thinking and reacting," Lenin explained. Pavlov was astounded. It seemed that Lenin wanted him to do for humans what he had already done for dogs. "Do you mean that you would like to standardize the population of Russia? Make them all behave in the same way?" he asked. "Exactly," replied Lenin. "Man can be corrected. Man can be made what we want him to be." --Orlando Figes, A People's Tragedy, 1997 p732-733 (We have the freakish ideology of evolution to thank for inspiring those such as Lenin who think and treat people as though they are nothing more than animals to be subject to social "sciences" like marxism and fascism.) But maybe what some people advocate here is more along these lines, only "kinder" and "gentler" and more "compassionate" secularism that still leads to shit thinking like Lenin's.

Between other things I personally study World Religions for (5) Years and in the end I got to the conclusion that Religion is not everything but can be a great way for one to achieve Cultural enlightenment.

It is Religion perfect? No! Actually some Religion are more about people mistakes than anything else, in which is good because we learn from their mistakes. I could go on but I want to be brief. In addition I think some of you here already inserted many good points into it.

If you want to understand Anthropology and the World's Culture, do not forget to learn about the World's Religion. That is in case you want to compete with the best of the bests out there. It is really up to you! The problem is that people are so confused these days about everything trying to pick up something to blame instead looking to their own mistakes. Look at the Media as an example; I think it was the Media and other Institutions, the ones that really helped and supported to foment this War, not Religion.

I do not see anyone talking about that.

TV it is the big or the biggest brain wash surpassing Religion, Schools and everything else out there. I think some of you guys are aiming at the wrong target.

Religion is not something you should deep your head into it, but for you to exercise you analytical skills just like everything else in life.

Even with the help of a Religious Culture, do you think you are going to make mistakes? Most likely, Yes! However, I just hope your mistakes are not life threatening and you learn from it by admitting it to yourself so you can grow from it by not repeating the same mistakes again...

...and that is some of the things that Religion will teach you!

Belief is admission of ignorance. One either knows or one doesn't know. When one doesn't know, one may choose to believe, or to not believe.

Eldamon - hundreds of millions? Where did you get such an unrealistic figure? Furthermore, it had nothing to do with atheism.

Agreed, so what would happen if you took away the empowerment? What happens when you remove the mask?

BrooksBrown,
I see what you're saying on the communist thing, well done - I concede that point to you.

My question still stands however, how many tragedies are too many? I'm not looking for an exact number so much as I'm trying to illustrate the loss of life, freedoms and flat out tyranny associated with the institution of religion.

Perhaps a better question is can religion exist without the extremism, as someone put it? Can it be more benevolent and tolerant of itself and others?

If someone wishes to do an "evil" act (war, genocide, murder, suicide, manipulation) they will do it even if religion was non-existant. "God" is only a mask for the reasons why people do what they do, think how they think, and say what they say. Religion offers empowerment, empowerment then offers control, which, in my opinion, is the main reason why we have "evil".

Eldamon,

I think its a question aimed in the wrong direction because we can never (as a practical matter) do the math required by net gain versus net cost. It's asking us to figure out a math problem without giving us the relevant information.

And my point about communism is that it is a-religious, or even more strongly, atheistic. So when you ask what would a culture without any religious institutions look like, I point you in the direction of cultural movements who devalue human life.

Not sure there is an actual answer here therefore not sure "wrongheadedness" can come into play. And if you made the case that politics is right behind religion on the scale of destruction I wouldn't disagree but that's a different topic. Also, when has there ever been a mass suicide or serial killing blamed on politics?

Eldamon and Vierotchka,
Look at the pile of bodies left in the wake of atheistic, communist regimes (hundreds of millions).

again, framing the question in terms of net cost versus net gain in wrongheaded. for starters, you can never gather and weight all the relevant data.

Wow! OK then, some of you are most persuasive in your oratory and quite eloquent I might add.

I have to ask a few questions the most pertinent is how many lives lost is too many? I concede extremist are mostly responsible for religions bad wrap but whether they drowned their children in the family bath tub, throw them off a bridge or kill en mas with an army how many deaths is too many? This is the "guns don't kill people, people kill people argument."

I said it would be great if people could just religiously get along but it seems we can't. It simply isn't in our nature. Given this, isn't prudent to stop the madness at its source? What would be lost by abandoning organized religion? I'm all for faith and community based, non-ritualistic organizations which I believe could easily fill in the void left by removing religion. So what would be the actual cost of removing religion, hypothetically?

Historically and statistically speaking, it is the monotheistic religions which wreak the most damage and wage the most wars.

onepark,

exactly, or how about: WATER: THE DEVILS LIQUID! While some people drink it, other people drown in it!

The same exact thing can be said about a democratic society and the corruption of democratic corruption.

In fact, I wouldn't be shocked to see a story on current.com with the caption "Got Communism?"

Crob,
I'm not sure I buy into your distinction btw religion an philosophy, as Plato's philosophy had 'religious' or 'supernatural' overtones and there are some religions who deny the supernatural (e.g., just about any strand of mainline Protestantism). But that point doesn't strike me as important anyhow.

Additionally, I don't see how 'religons' supernatural underpinnings make it immune from criticism. It seems to me it is the source of its criticism, at least from materialist quarters. Although, I will grant that haphazard appeals to "Only God knows the answer to that," are not always justified.

Now to your question of how Jesus' ethic/philosophy might stand up under critical scrutiny. I think a persons answer to this question will be determined by other philosophical commitments, like whether or not you believe in a soul that exists beyond death; whether communion with God is possible; whether or not there is a Purpose to life; etc.

But you also have to remember Jesus had a different audience than Tony Robbins or Sartre, so in order to compare teachings you are going to have to get at the principles and values that undergird the teachings....and again, your values will dictate how you evaluate Jesus. You might think that Jesus' ethic to love your enemy is bullshit. Fair enough. You might think that Jesus' instruction for us to depend on God in the same manner children depend on parents is Patronizing and not endearing. Fair enough. You might think his feeding of 5,000 hungry or healing the leper or speaking to prostitute is nothing short of pink hearted liberalism. Fair enough.

Hmm.... very contentious...

To give it to everyone straight: Religion, despite being mainly attributed to peace, virtue, submission, love and kindness, still creates this negativity and violence attributed to extremism. And that's it: religion seems to give rise to extremism.

I do understand where this argument is coming from. Religion clearly does create violence to a degree. Even the founding and process of advocating and converting people to a religion required military strength (i.e. in spread of Christianity, Islam).

However, I hold and remain with the belief that it is human flaws which give way to extremism. Religion may teach virtues, but as imperfect, mortal beings we are vulnerable to being negatively influenced, brainwashed and to misinterpreting religious doctrine.

Furthermore, although religion may cause a degree of extremism, the overwhelming majority will always be moderates (unless a dictator were to blahdey blah...). Extremism only accounts for a tiny minority of the population.

Take Iraq: extremists are planting bombs and waging war against each other and ordinary civilians. People are being killed in their hundreds all over the country in the lawlessness. The point is, it is all extremism and although many thousands of people have died, it is only a tiny percentage of the population - the innocent Iraqis are being killed.

I must emphasise the fact that the news has exaggerated tremendously what has been happening in Iraq, only reporting the violence by extremists.

Maybe religion can be reformed. However, I find it particularly dubious in today's society, where people are strong believers of their principles.

P.S. I am a Muslim. Yes I am also 15.

The question in the title was to suggest religion has some good qualities as well but does the over all bad out weigh the potential good?

If everyone where free to practice or not practice their respective religions without the prostilatizing of others the question would be moot but that isn't the case. Someone quoted the 1st amendment making the case for freedom of religion but is the truly the case?

Consider this, there was a rumor running around the net about Obama being Muslim. He had to state over and over again to dispel this rumor. But why was the even necessary? There's no law that states the President has to be of a certain religion but if he or any of the candidates had in fact been a student of Islam their campaigns would never have gotten off the ground.

I agree organized religion can do some good. Community based services, social movements, disaster relief all fine causes. But at what cost and couldn't all this and more be done without the ritualistic overtone or by a neutral secular organization?

Question: If Jesus had absolutely no supernatural powers whatsoever and was just a regular ordinary human philosopher -- wouldn't he actually be LESS insightful and LESS successful in terms of actually helping people than Anthony Robbins?

I'm just saying: strip away the supernatural aspects of any religion and it's just a philosophy, right?

We can all look at Plato's philosophy and judge is critically and pick out parts that work and disgard parts that don't.

Religion, because of it's supernatural underpinning, is immune from that kind of critical examination. People feel obligated to accept it entirely because of its (alleged) supernatural authority.

If we simply stripped away ALL the supernatural elements of Christianity and treated it exactly like a philosophy -- how would it stand up by modern standards?

And if the answer is, "Not very well" then what should our next logical move be?

"Organized Religion" has several advantages over Disorganized (or private) Religion. First, as an institution, Organized forms of religion are able to preserve intellectual and ritualistic traditions, they are able to mobilize their followers in causes of social justice (e.g., Civil Rights Movement), they are able to share their material resources for the benefit of the marginalized (e.g., orphanages, hospitals, schools), etc.

This initial post and most of the discussion is wrongheaded. You can't reason from "Evil things have been done in the name of Religion" to "God doesnt exist." Or even more forcefully, there is no logical problem with suggesting that 'Evil things have been done in the name of the God who actually exists."

Peep:
http://prosblogion.ektopos.com/archives/2008/05/christian-way-o.html#comments

This is a beautiful topic, why is the rating so low?

Men wrote the Bible, not God. Organized Religion is the thing, like Government, that is what's corrupt to me.

"Controlling my tongue?" That sounds so UnAmerican and oppressive. Why can't God handle someone asking questions, and why should we keep believing lies the church tells us without question or debate?

Believe in your heart and keep love there and everything will be fine. That's what I go by. Whatever you believe is fine too, just don't inflict it upon me and try to instill fear inside me cuz I don't adhere to your beliefs. I would not do that to anyone. Live and let live, but never harm.

The Bible does not scare me, and neither does God. That is not His intention. That is man's intention to scare us into belief. I do not fear God, God Is Love, not intimidation and exclusion like Man instills in folks.

James 1:26-27 The New Living translation. "26 If you claim to be religious but don't control your tongue, you are just fooling your self, and your religion is worthless. 27 Pure and lasting religion in the sight of God our Father means that we must care for orphans and widows in their troubles, and refuse to let the world corrupt us."

I don't think there's any one "right" or "wrong" religion either. Those are the people that scare me the most--the one's that think their religion is the ONE ABOVE ALL. I don't like it when their beliefs are inflicted upon me, leave me out of it and let me believe what I want--what makes what these "RIGHT" believers think there's nothing else and that if you don't believe as they do, then you go to hell, even if you've lived your life in love and goodness. Makes no sense to me.

Having a heart and a conscience, and doing the right things in life is what will get you into heaven. Not thinking that your belief is superior to others and just cuz you show up on church you'll get into heaven and I won't?

What if a "saved" person murdered someone out of hatred? Will he/she still find those Pearly Gates just cuz they were saved years before?

While this is all treu to a certain extent, the truth is that having religious beliefs and belonging to a community does make some people happy. You can argue that they would be happier if they did not hold these beliefs, but I think you'd be hard pressed to convince them. The trick, then, is to show people that there are alternatives to organised religious beliefs without being a Jehovah's Witness or a snob about it.

In my family there are so many different religions, and they all argue theirs are the "right religion", and everyone else's is the "wrong way to worship". That is why my God is in my heart and hopefully the way I live, and not in a church, or temple, or wherever.

" I have no real objections to religion, because for the most part it doesn't do me any harm"

Religion does harm when the practioners attempt to persuade others to their cause. Most would gladly embrace the power of the state and the power of the sword to coerce or insist that non-believers join them.

History is littered with the bodies of the resistors.

It is important to distinguish "religion" and "church" or clergy. They are not the same. Religion is the faith whereas the chuch is the institution associated with it. The institutions need to change in many religions. However, faith in itself is something personal. I don't believe that religion holds societies together... today, the difference of faith divides us. The institutions were created to hold societies together but they are not doing their job. In the end I am convinced that the spiritual needs of all humans are the same. A religious institution is just a way of giving that faith a cultural framework. The conflicts we have today are not religious, they are cultural and should be tackled as such.

I agree that religion has no main point other than to hold societies together and to form social cohesion and social control. Religion has been around for milleniums, and we never can get it right, can we? I believe that there are functions of society that ARE impacted positively by religion, but sometimes religion can cause major dysfunctions as well. However, I have no real objections to religion, because for the most part it doesn't do me any harm. I just don't like how religions are judged and people are persecuted for their beliefs. To me, religion is a big wheel with a lot of spokes leading to one central place, so everyone ends up in the same place, no matter how you choose to get there.

To be in awe of life is true religion.

religion is the problem. the faith is not. religion does things that act out beyond what the faith is supposed to be teaching in the name of that faith. this is where the problem lies

'Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?'

Douglas Adams

Whether you think it's worth it or not, it's here to stay.

Only the three western religions (judaism, christianity, and islam) have created warfare strife. The religions of the east are mainly just systems of philosophy intended to teach the practitioner to still the turmoil in the mind. Once the mind is stilled you don't become a nilhist you become a lover of life, and that to me is the miracle about this world that science has the challenge of explaining.

The western religions teach the individual to work for the betterment of society and do not lay a lot of emphasis on individual peacefulness. Thus, violent and selfish members of the faith never calm themselves down before going out and "helping" the world and you get a violent and selfish world.

"They are very sincere, these fanatics, the most sincere of human beings; but they are quite as irresponsible as other lunatics in the world."
- Vivekananda

I think that people who commit serious crimes and actions have mental issues and use religion as an excuse. Whatever god these people worship I never want to come in contact with it.

Science can become a religion too if you're not careful.

If people want to believe in a talking snake, an elephant headed boy or an intergalactic ruler named Xenu then so be it. It definitely makes life more entertaining for those of us who don't. Believe whatever you want to but do no harm to others. That includes keeping those beliefs out of government. The separation between church and state exists for a very important reason.

I believe that there is no god and religion is simply a way of controlling people with weak minds who would rather not think for themselves.

I totally disagree the science does not explain everything, in fact I am sure there is a scientific explanation for everything but we just haven't fingured it out yet. Don't limit science to the bounds of mere human knowledge, our knowledge of science is continually growing but just because we cannot yet explain something does not mean there is no explanation.

Religion has caused war from the beginning of time.

I don't believe religion causes wars. Those who start the wars, do so with $$$ in mind, they just use religion as a recruiting tool.

I actually wrote a more in depth blog about religion on another site a while back. It's a little edgier and expresses MY personal belief. Check it out if you have a moment. You may have to go back a few rants to find it but it's there, trust me.

http://u-everwonder.blogspot.com/

I believe in a Supreme Being, because it makes me uncomfortable spinning around in space not attached to anything with no one in charge. I believe there is God in everyone. It's up to us to find it. But, just in case This back sliding Catholic wants the Last Rites.

Outstanding thoughts and opinions all. Thanks to everyone for sharing and expressing themselves in an incredibly thoughtful and articulate manor well done all!

to answer the question though:
the great thing about organized religion is the ability to share your beliefs and faith with others. it is a great way to form a deeply bonded community. the power that lies in ritual and cerimony at a large grouping of people is powerful and can be beautiful.
in my view, its all about the intent behind the particular sect, group or leaders that determine the helpfulness of a certain community.... there are obviously some groups that have veered so far from a beneficial path they don't know where it is any longer.

overhaul is needed in many cases. hierarchal structure is ludicrous.

i think that organized religion has BECOME a problem. the ideals and allegorical stories found in the 'sacred' texts are rampant with lofty morality, probing questions, examples of just action and myths about creation and destruction. these are wonderful things and can expand people's perception of reality. these books do more if taken as a guide rather than a strict set of rules that have BECOME outdated. organization has come from the desire of the greedy to posses power. they take archetypal imagery and manipulate it in order to force people to submit.

so ya, i agree.

as jesus said: "i am the way, the truth and the light. the only way to GOD is through me." if you take GOD to be ultimate reality in whatever form suits YOUR needs, all that is needed is to keep your eyes to the sky and to always seek the truth, when you find it within yourself, you are one with GOD.

I think what does religion in is its ego. It always wants to have the final say in everything.

Wouldn't you consider religion a flaw of humanity?

I know I do.

the main three religions on earth are all following abrahams personal god.a god that man claims is of love.this god seems more like a god of war to me.

the only noble religion is one you find yourself.
-me

I agree that the issues arising from what people call religion have been predominantly negative but I blame the flaws of humanity rather then the religions themselves. It is obvious to me that Jesus did not preach child molestation and Muhammad did not preach the murder of innocent people... It is the arrogant and ignorance of people that leads to the problems.

Your own freedom of course. Whatever lets you sleep at night. If praying to a tree in a space ship makes you feel better, than so be it, but we're all simply looking for answers to why we live. I choose to count on myself.

Well put, I agree wholeheartedly.

whose "freedom" ?

"This is my simple religion. There is no need for temples; no need for complicated philosophy. Our own brains, our own heart is our temple; the philosophy is kindness." - The Dalai Lama

Wonderful position, eldamon. I agree. 'Nuff said.

All religions, arts and sciences are branches of the same tree. All these aspirations are directed toward ennobling man's life, lifting it from the sphere of mere physical existence and leading the individual towards freedom.

-Albert Einstein

Oi, thank you from the bottom of my heart for saying this! I've always held this view, albeit much less eloquently. Every time I try to explain it, though, people take it as me trying to attack their religion. It isn't about religion whatsoever! It's about the war and horror it produces.

People always tell me to take the bad with the good and that I shouldn't let the "bad people" get in the way of me worshipping God or Allah or Buddha; I get it. The concept of god and all his power is infallible, but mankind is not... However, I refuse to support the establishment.

So again, it's so refreshing to hear a coexisting kind of view while actively rejecting the flaws in the institution instead of just accepting them like we're told :]